Eight years ago was a special time for me, I was heading to university and ready to start a new adventure. However, perhaps more importantly (although at the time I can't say I held this view!) I could vote. Coming from a poor, working class background, it seems only logical that I held left-wing ideologies, taking the form of social/economic socialism. Albeit, not a socialist political party (well not at the time anyway!) I supported the Labour party. They were quite insistent that they were the true supporters of the working class and social justice and at the time this appealed to me greatly. So what happened? Why have I abandoned the Labour party when they are on the brink of becoming a socialist party? Well, that's what I hope to be explaining in this article.
Firstly, let's get Brexit out of the way with shall we? I mean this in a metaphorical sense, no need to rush Theresa May! Brexit was a historical landmark in British politics, no matter what side you were on, we can all agree that the results of that referendum will change the face of European politics for quite some time. A mandate was given by the British people to leave the EU, a large proportion of which were the working classes of this country. The working class vote is something which Labour (and the left in general) claim to represent. So why is it then, that Owen Smith (the potential leader of the Labour party) has said he will abandon them and try to block a democratic mandate? and I quote,
"We will vote in Parliament to block any attempt to invoke Article 50 until Theresa May commits to a second referendum".
There is this idea that the poor working classes have been misguided and that they need a second referedum to get the "right answer". This idea has been at the forefront of many left-wing MPs and activists, that the working class do not know what is best for them, and that your almighty protectors in the Labour party do. Similar to a Platonian Republic, where university educated middle classes rule over the poor with "kindness and pity". That is the disconnect, the MPs and activists of the Labour party are from the ilk of the liberal middle-classes, a privileged upbringing, if one could ever use that phrase. They presume, that because they are more "educated" in Philosophy, Ancient history and English Literature, that they must know what is best for the working classes. Well you are wrong. Simple as. For example, how can you tell a working class self-employed trader that he is "misguided" for voting Brexit when he has seen his earnings drop due to increase supply of Eastern European tradesman, willing to work for lower pay? In this mans reality, EU immigration laws have left him worse off, he doesn't need a middle-class voice-person, telling him he is misguided, when in reality it is the middle-class privileged group, that have no experience of his trade, that are misguided. This disconnect becomes even greater when people voice these concerns and then immediately get labeled as "racists" by those who are meant to be representing them. Then we all act surprised that in the last general election, UKIP took more votes away from Labour than the Conservatives. You would have thought the left would have learnt from this, but alas, they have not.
Let's move away from the general disconnect and talk about Jeremy Corbyn, the so-called messiah, or maybe just a naughty boy? I am about 90% sure he will be the new leader of the Labour party, the man who rules with an iron fist and an economic plan derived from 1940s Britain. There has been a lot of criticism from media outlets, some of which is totally unjustified, who really cares if there were available seats on that train... I mean who really cares? However, some of it has been justified, I'm going to ignore a lot of it for this piece as there is so much I could go into, instead I will focus on his policy of nationalisation. Firstly, what is nationalisation? (apart from being a mouthful!) It is, in it's most basic form, the transition of private capital into public capital. The idea, is that, under public ownership, the service will be aimed to deliver a service that best suits the state (and thereby it's citizenship). That all sounds great!
However, how does this work in practise? Well like many great ideas, they simply fail to be implemented into reality. We thankfully have case studies that we can look at in our own history, to see how these ideas work out. After World War Two, steel, coal and railway industries were nationalised, in the aim of helping to rebuild Britain after the war. By the 1970's and 80s the industries were so highly inefficient, full of bureaucracy and damaging to the environment, that they had to be returned to private hands. The fundamental problem is, that without competition, the state does not need to keep the industries efficient and up-to-date, instead they will tend to keep throwing more money at the industries, basically subsidising inefficiency and thus the cycle completes itself. 'Subsidies meet Inefficiency. Inefficiency, Subsidies'. To have the best service possible, you need competition and lots of it, so the best service prevails and has to keep being innovative and efficient to survive. We hear a lot of rhetoric from the left that it is the right that wants to take us back to the "good old days", however it seems that currently it is them who want to take us back to the yesteryear of state funded inefficiency and higher taxation.
While we are talking about the railways, I have to mention the billionaire Richard Branson, I think peoples comments about this man epitomises the behaviour of the left perfectly. The billionaires of the world have been known as the 'boogie man' of the left for quite some time and many are criticising him and his fellow businessmen for coming out against nationalisation. However, it was only a few months ago when he was saying
"I think there should be a second referendum,"
when asked about Brexit, and the left got behind him and his billionaire friends, saying we should all listen to him. This conformation bias is remarkable to observe, one month we love our billionaire overlords and then the next month we denounce them, intellectual consistency is what is needed in this time and it is apparently lacking in abundance.
Lastly, I would like to discuss the 'oh so real' issue of immigration. For those of you who know me, my last name comes from the French word 'De-L'eau', roughly translating to 'of the water'. My ancestors were indeed French (I know, I'm sorry) and came to Britain seeking religious asylum, along with another 50,000 Huguenots, in what has came to be known as the largest single migration of a peoples to Britain in our history. So my view of immigration surely must be that it is a good thing, right? My answer would be, the right kind is. I think a lot of the working classes have no problem with immigration from peoples who are culturally and economically similar to us, much like the Huguenots were back in the 15th and 16th Century. The issues come when former soviet territories who are seeking economic opportunity enter on a large scale, or peoples entering the country from areas of the world from culturally 'different' societies.
The former mentioned economic migrants are great for businesses, that I cannot deny, labour at low costs are exactly what businesses want but who do you think this hurts the most? It's not the MPs, not the corporate machine, nor the middle-classes, or the university students. It hurts the working classes. They see the low-wage jobs being taken up, they see their wages stagnating, they see their communities and their workplaces suddenly having a second language. This is the reality of many a working class man, take a look at any factory and see for yourself. This is a huge issue for the working classes that simply gets ignored by the left, or even worse, slandered as a racist bigot. When the ones that are meant to be giving you a voice are simply pandering to the economic interests of the elites and establishment, then I can see why many working class voters are putting their trust in - perhaps wrongly so - UKIP and the like.
The latter mentioned migration from areas of the world culturally opposite to western ideals. This is a problem in the UK but thankfully - one thing I can commend David Cameron for - not as bad as it is in mainland Europe. The left, in Germany in particular, has opened its borders to migration from the Middle-East on quite a massive scale. 1.1 million people registered as asylum seekers on arrival in 2015 alone, migration of this scale from an area of the world that is culturally incompatible with western liberal democracies has resulted in massive social upheaval and once again, who does this affect the most? You guessed it. The working class. Most of these asylum seekers are housed in working class communities and so they have to deal with the issues first hand, while liberal elites can simply relax in their suburbs, feeling good about themselves for their virtue and piety. The virtue signalling of the left has caused real harm to the working class, who did not vote for this, nor do they want this, then when they dare speak out against the social tensions building in their society, they get labelled as bigots by the virtue-signalling elites, who are privileged enough not to deal with the issues personally. In essence, there are real issues which the working class are suffering from, yet the ones who are meant to represent them are failing to do so.
All in all, the basic idea is if you do not tackle the issues the working class are calling out for you to tackle, then you will find yourself losing their support, this happened in the last General Election and I will expect the trend to continue. Essentially, in it's current form, left-wing politics will not be electable for decades to come. I look at myself as a working class man and see now that it is not I who has abandoned the left, but it is the left that has abandoned me.
This is a very small summary of my thoughts of the left currently, I have many more ideas I would like to discuss on this topic in later articles as I tackle what has happened to left-wing politics.
No comments:
Post a Comment